ANITA MANOJKUMAR BAID,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), SURAT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the addition made by the AO under Section 68 was devoid of merit. The assessee had discharged the initial onus by providing documentary evidence, and the AO failed to establish any money trail or provide opportunities for cross-examination.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed long-term capital gains (LTCG) as exempt income on the sale of shares of 'Pine Animation Ltd'. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these gains as bogus, suspecting penny stock manipulation based on investigation reports and statements from brokers.
What were the issues?
Whether the LTCG claimed as exempt on sale of shares is genuine or bogus, and if bogus, whether it can be added as unexplained cash credit under Section 68.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 10(38),Section 68,Section 69C,Section 250,Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत "यायपीठ, सूरत । In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Surat Bench, Surat Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member [ Assessment Year: 2015-16 ] Αnita Μanojkumar Baid (Individual), Ward 2(1)(1), Surat, Vs.
Plot No. B-22, C-22, T M B House, Majura Gate, Surat, 127, Jari Kasab Society-3, Canal Road, Gujarat-395001 Bhathena, Surat, Gujarat-395002 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.PAN/GIR No.: AGAPB5048B (Assessee) (Respondent) [ Assessment Year: 2015-16 ] Manojkumar Jhumarmal Baid Ward 2(1)(1), Surat, Vs. (Individual), Majura Gate, Surat, 502, Poonam Apartment, Ghoddod Gujarat-395001 Road, Surat -395007, Gujarat-395002 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.PAN/GIR No.: ABIPB6286E (Assessee) (Respondent) [ Assessment Year: 2015-16 ] Plot No. B-22, С-22 Т M В House, Surat, Gujarat-395001 127, Jari Kasab Society-3, Canal Road Bhatena Surat, Gujarat-395001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.PAN/GIR No.: ACHPB9642A (Assessee) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by : Shri Ajay Uke, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18/05/2026
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 10(38)
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Karan Dilipkumar Patel L/H of Late… vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi…ITA 353/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Jay Patel, Raipur vs ITO, Ward-3(1), RaipurITA 684/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: Heard12 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026